ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:[/b]
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
The argument claims that the electronic games rating system, although similar to the movie rating system, is not working because it is self regulated and violation fines are nominal, Hence, the gaming rating system should be overseen by an independent body.
First, the argument readily assumes that because the electronic game rating system is self regulated, it is not working well. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. There are numerous examples in other areas of business or commerce, where the entities are self regulated and rather successful. For instance, FIA, the Formula1 racing organization is self regulated. Yet, the sport is very popular and successful, drawing millions of spectators around the world each year. Tickets are rather expensive, races are shown on pay-per-view, and nearly all drivers are paid very well. Another example is the paralleled movie rating system that the argument mentions. The author fails to clarify whether it is working well, but it is clear that the movie rating system is pretty well received by people, who often base their decisions to go see a movie with kids or not on the movie rating. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly gave examples of how the self regulatory system led to bad ratings and customer dissatisfaction.
Second, the argument claims that any violation fees for bad electronic game ratings are nominal. It thus suggests that this is yet another reason for the rating system not working. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between the monetary amount of the fines and the quality of the electronic game rating system. In fact, the argument does not even draw a parallel with the mentioned movie rating system and its violation fines. If any such correlation had been shown for the movie rating system, which supposedly works well, then the author would have sounded a bit more convincing.
Finally, the argument concludes that an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that violate the rating system, should be punished. From this statement again, it is not at all clear how an independent regulatory body can do a better job than a self regulated one. Without supporting evidence and examples from other businesses where independent regulatory bodies have done a great job, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. As a result, this conclusion has no legs to stand on.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-19 | kagrawal61@gmail.com | 89 | view |
| 2018-05-18 | maverickmaven | 73 | view |
| 2016-08-11 | Aummul | 83 | view |
- ESSAY QUESTION:The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:[/b]"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if 73
- The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo, Inc., a chain of hobby shops."Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon. We discovered that th 50
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 420 350
No. of Characters: 2079 1500
No. of Different Words: 199 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.527 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.95 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.596 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.105 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.733 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.337 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.482 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, if, second, so, then, thus, well, for instance, in fact, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2138.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 420.0 441.139720559 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09047619048 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52701905584 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66585446815 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492857142857 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 673.2 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3361087176 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.526315789 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1052631579 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05263157895 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258581214271 0.218282227539 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0909946442359 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0803987456198 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191851113112 0.128457276422 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0847051412442 0.0628817314937 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.